Niche ammo in court(Buffalo Bore,etc)
- Thread starter HiBC
- Start date
- Status
Deaf Smith
New member
I really can't see 'boutique' ammo as a court issue UNLESS the shooting is already in a gray area. Say your gun has skull-and-crossbones etched on the side and the shooting was not a strait forward SD and has no evidence like surveillance cameras, witnesses and such.
Especially here in Texas. Using Buffalo Bore ammo (same JHP or LSWHP stuff) but with just a tad more velocity isn't gonna raise an eyebrow.
Deaf
Especially here in Texas. Using Buffalo Bore ammo (same JHP or LSWHP stuff) but with just a tad more velocity isn't gonna raise an eyebrow.
Deaf
Spats McGee
Administrator
And if you find yourself in a position of needing to admit GSR evidence, you've got the same evidentiary problems that I've outlined in the past.SaxonPig said:
And water is wet. If you wind up in court because you shot someone, you're already in a gray area.Deaf Smith said:
Defenders don't generally get to pick when and where they're attacked.Deaf Smith said:
One hopes. One also hopes that they won't get into an altercation in San Antonio and draw a firearms-ignorant jury.Deaf Smith said:
Options for "non-niche" 38 super SD ammo seems to be limited.
American Eagle 115 +P and Sig 125 V Crown:
https://www.targetsportsusa.com/38-super-ammo-c-53.aspx#
Winchester Silvertip
http://www.luckygunner.com/handgun/38-super-ammo
Underwood (Niche? Name sounds innocuous compared to Buffalo Bore)
https://underwoodammo.com/shop/38-super-p-124-grain-bonded-jacketed-hollow-point/
American Eagle 115 +P and Sig 125 V Crown:
https://www.targetsportsusa.com/38-super-ammo-c-53.aspx#
Winchester Silvertip
http://www.luckygunner.com/handgun/38-super-ammo
Underwood (Niche? Name sounds innocuous compared to Buffalo Bore)
https://underwoodammo.com/shop/38-super-p-124-grain-bonded-jacketed-hollow-point/
wild cat mccane
New member
please realize all the above is nonsense. A trail jury reviews the law. What people are describing above is tv court.
Your actions are argued and that's it. Someone will cite one or two cases but what I am saying is that it doesn't matter.
Your actions are argued and that's it. Someone will cite one or two cases but what I am saying is that it doesn't matter.
Spats McGee
Administrator
No, I'm pretty sure I wasn't on TV when I researched evidence or jury perception issues. Don't recall ever being on TV during one of my trials, either.wild cat mccane said:
One or two cases may be all we have to go on. It's not like jury perception issues show up in appellate opinions.wild cat mccane said:
ammo.crafter
New member
The jury
Don't overlook a jury's perception of a shooting and
views about issues related to the case as well as wit-
nesses who may be called to testify.
Voir dire is also very important.
Don't overlook a jury's perception of a shooting and
views about issues related to the case as well as wit-
nesses who may be called to testify.
Voir dire is also very important.
OldMarksman
Staff
A trial jury evaluates the facts presented in court that apply to the case at hand. The jury receives instructions about the law.
Yes--on the basis of evidence about said actions made known to the jury.
Some important evidence may never be made known to the jury.
Some of that may have been lost at the scene--empty shells, an edged weapon....
Some may be ruled inadmissible---GSR test data and related expert testimony if the ammunitionn had been hand loaded.
Other evidence may be incomplete--something moving into the way of video images at an important time.
OldMarksman
Staff
How about the criminals who do the shooting?
The reason that things go to trial in the criminal justice system is to determine who the criminal is.
Seems how other unqualified individuals have chimed in and seem to disregard the statements of qualified individuals I figure I can chime back in.
Being on trial indicates that the use of a firearm was not so simplistic as to be simply accepted as being self defense or some other legal use. I suppose, an even worse case scenario, is that it is politically motivated and the prosecutor is trying for a political conviction without regards to the actual facts.
The original poster asked about evidentiary concerns. My mistake in my original replies as I am most interested in (but no qualified to give legal advise) on jury deliberations and how evidence may impact a jury (see the Harold Fish) case.
A "standard" load created, marketed, and produced by a neutral third party is not likely, in my unqualified opinion, to present remarkable evidentiary concerns. The two concerns are: does the evidence produced support the chain of events as told by the defendant and if the evidence does not why does it not. For the purpose of this discussion I am going to assume the defendant's memory is accurate and the his or her telling of the chain of events is truthful - obviously both of these things are in question in a non-theoretical discussion.
If the evidence does support the chain of events as told by the defendant then everything is wonderful. In this case the prosecution is not likely to bring it up and, as the defendant is not likely to testify, it is not likely to be part of the defense. The prosecution, in seeing exactly how a particular brand of ammo functions in regards to a particular test is likely to purchase some of that ammo off the shelf and test the results against it. Everything lines up you are good to go.
What if it doesn't line up? This is where you, as a defendant, have a clear advantage over hand-loaded ammunition. Why do you recollect the shooting happening at a couple yards while the prosecution finds evidence, such as gun shot residue, that shows it occurring at a much longer range. You at this point are going to be left questioning the manufacturing process. You're team can pull a few hundred rounds and start testing for consistency - an inconsistency would throw off the test results and throw off the evidence introduced by the prosecutor.
Frankly I am not certain how a database of evidentiary material would help you. It is unlikely the prosecution is going to use round specific evidence to clear you and its unlikely your defense is going to find such detailed forensic information to be central to your case if things have gone that badly for you. In a justified shooting defense you are basically only trying to maintain your version of the events as simply as possible. Evidence introduced to be used against you will need to be called into question or obscured some how but I don't see that being an issue with commonly manufactured "boutique" ammunition that your defense will be readily able to purchase.
Being on trial indicates that the use of a firearm was not so simplistic as to be simply accepted as being self defense or some other legal use. I suppose, an even worse case scenario, is that it is politically motivated and the prosecutor is trying for a political conviction without regards to the actual facts.
The original poster asked about evidentiary concerns. My mistake in my original replies as I am most interested in (but no qualified to give legal advise) on jury deliberations and how evidence may impact a jury (see the Harold Fish) case.
A "standard" load created, marketed, and produced by a neutral third party is not likely, in my unqualified opinion, to present remarkable evidentiary concerns. The two concerns are: does the evidence produced support the chain of events as told by the defendant and if the evidence does not why does it not. For the purpose of this discussion I am going to assume the defendant's memory is accurate and the his or her telling of the chain of events is truthful - obviously both of these things are in question in a non-theoretical discussion.
If the evidence does support the chain of events as told by the defendant then everything is wonderful. In this case the prosecution is not likely to bring it up and, as the defendant is not likely to testify, it is not likely to be part of the defense. The prosecution, in seeing exactly how a particular brand of ammo functions in regards to a particular test is likely to purchase some of that ammo off the shelf and test the results against it. Everything lines up you are good to go.
What if it doesn't line up? This is where you, as a defendant, have a clear advantage over hand-loaded ammunition. Why do you recollect the shooting happening at a couple yards while the prosecution finds evidence, such as gun shot residue, that shows it occurring at a much longer range. You at this point are going to be left questioning the manufacturing process. You're team can pull a few hundred rounds and start testing for consistency - an inconsistency would throw off the test results and throw off the evidence introduced by the prosecutor.
Frankly I am not certain how a database of evidentiary material would help you. It is unlikely the prosecution is going to use round specific evidence to clear you and its unlikely your defense is going to find such detailed forensic information to be central to your case if things have gone that badly for you. In a justified shooting defense you are basically only trying to maintain your version of the events as simply as possible. Evidence introduced to be used against you will need to be called into question or obscured some how but I don't see that being an issue with commonly manufactured "boutique" ammunition that your defense will be readily able to purchase.
Jim Watson
New member
Just to give you something else to worry about, not all factory ammunition is alike, even if of the same brand and SKU. GSR from your lot might not be the same as gsr from what "CSI" can get to test, if it comes down to that.
Besides the admissibility issues of the history of the man that Fish shot, were there also issues regarding forensic evidence for and against Fish? In any case, it doesn't sound like the case hinged on the caliber/ammunition used.
Edit: My knowledge of the case doesn't go much beyond this video. I think the relevant part starts around the 6 minute mark. If this guy is off his rocker in this analysis, then I am too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBkjdutVmFA
Last edited:
Spats McGee
Administrator
^^Not forensic/admissibility issues. I'm operating purely from memory here, but it seems that post-trial interviews revealed that there was some discomfort (maybe even only one juror?) with the 10 mm that he carried. I'm not sure the case "hinged" on it, but one uncomfortable but vocal juror can make quite a difference in deliberations.
Have you ever seen a GSW that was made at extreme close range? It is pretty easy to tell when you know what you are looking for.
Too many people get all wrapped around the axle about this. If you are the victim in a robbery and say the BG was 4 feet away when in reality he was 10 feet away it makes no difference.
No, a trial is held because there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and the person standing trial committed said crime and he plead not guilty at an earlier hearing and either a plea bargain was not offered or it was rejected. A criminal trial is not held as a fact finding mission, that is called an investigation.
"...using boutique ammunition may be..." And will be debunked just as fast as the whole use of reloads argument by any good lawyer.
"...GSR testing..." Nobody will retain Gun Shot Residue test results. GSR tests only prove a person fired a firearm. Doesn't ID the firearm, gun powder used or what cartridge.
"...not favored in court..." More about civil suits by the criminals mommy and daddy looking to cash in.
"...same kind of records of exactly..." Those records are only for the purpose of repeating the load. They have no use to anybody otherwise.
"...GSR testing..." Nobody will retain Gun Shot Residue test results. GSR tests only prove a person fired a firearm. Doesn't ID the firearm, gun powder used or what cartridge.
"...not favored in court..." More about civil suits by the criminals mommy and daddy looking to cash in.
"...same kind of records of exactly..." Those records are only for the purpose of repeating the load. They have no use to anybody otherwise.
OldMarksman
Staff
The important part the reloads argument has been settled before SCOTUS--Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals--and the results are reflected in the Federal Rules of Evidences and in those of quite a number of states. Both sides had good lawyers.
And they are used to estimate the distance. Have been for years. Not perfect, but they may be dispositive.
True. Irrelevant.
If the records have been prepared properly using calibrated equipment and accepted procedures, by independent factory lot testers who are not at all connected with either party in a trial, and if their maintenance and custody are not subject to question, they make the test data from exemplars admissible in court. Confirmed by Daubert v Merrell Dow, but true beforehand.
OldMarksman
Staff
Maybe not. Maybe it will.
The issue irises when, if you say an attacker was moving at you from extremely close range, and good honest eyewitnesses whose attention was drawn to the situation only after you had moved some distance, you will likely have a credibility problem. That could be a killer.
Perhaps, in some cases, expert testimony concerning the testing of the data from your ammunition will help prove your case.
IF the jury is allowed to hear it..
- Status